What do you think?
Rate this book
How to Read the Bible: An Expert's Guide to Understanding Sacred Texts Through Three Essential Lenses
Renowned religion expert and Harvard Divinity School professor Harvey Cox deepens our experience of the Bible, revealing the three primary ways we read it, why each is important, and how we can integrate these approaches for a richer understanding and appreciation of key texts throughout the Old and New Testaments. The Bible is the heart of devotional practice, a source of guidance and inspiration rich with insightful life lessons. On the other side of the spectrum, academics have studied the Bible using scientific analysis to examine its historical significance and meaning. The gap between these readings has resulted in a schism with far-reaching Without historical context, ordinary people are left to interpret the Bible literally, while academic readings overlook the deeply personal connections established in church pews, choir benches, and backyard study groups. In How To Read the Bible , Cox explores three different lenses commonly used to bring the Bible into By bringing these together, Cox shows the Bible in all its rich diversity and meaning and offers us a contemporary activist version that wrestles with issues of feminism, war, homosexuality, and race. The result is a living resource that is perpetually evolving as our understanding changes and deepens from generation to generation.
272 pages, Paperback
First published April 14, 2015
112 people are currently reading
249 people want to read
About the author
Harvey Cox
53 books45 followersHarvey Gallagher Cox Jr., Ph.D. (History and Philosophy of Religion, Harvard University, 1963; B.D., Yale Divinity School, 1955) was Hollis Professor of Divinity at Harvard, where he had been teaching since 1965, both at HDS and in the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences, until his retirement in 2009.
An American Baptist minister, he was the Protestant chaplain at Temple University and the director of religious activities at Oberlin College; an ecumenical fraternal worker in Berlin; and a professor at Andover Newton Theological School. His research and teaching interests focus on the interaction of religion, culture, and politics. Among the issues he explores are: urbanization, theological developments in world Christianity, Jewish-Christian relations, and current spiritual movements in the global setting. His most recent book is When Jesus Came to Harvard: Making Moral Decisions Today. His Secular City, published in 1965, became an international bestseller with more than 1 million copies sold. It was selected by the University of Marburg as one of the most influential books of Protestant theology in the twentieth century.
An American Baptist minister, he was the Protestant chaplain at Temple University and the director of religious activities at Oberlin College; an ecumenical fraternal worker in Berlin; and a professor at Andover Newton Theological School. His research and teaching interests focus on the interaction of religion, culture, and politics. Among the issues he explores are: urbanization, theological developments in world Christianity, Jewish-Christian relations, and current spiritual movements in the global setting. His most recent book is When Jesus Came to Harvard: Making Moral Decisions Today. His Secular City, published in 1965, became an international bestseller with more than 1 million copies sold. It was selected by the University of Marburg as one of the most influential books of Protestant theology in the twentieth century.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
February 17, 2016
Having never read (or heard of) Harvey Cox, former Professor of Divinity at Harvard and considered one of the preeminent theologians in the US, I didn't know what to expect from this rather short (for me) book of 249 pages, counting footnotes; I was quite surprised at how much I enjoyed and especially learned from How to Read the Bible.
First of all, this is not the book to read if as a Christian you believe that everything found in the Bible is literally true and cannot be questioned on any level (in fact don't because I can almost guarantee that you will be throwing the book at a wall...Professor Cox doesn't pull his punches regarding fundamentalists and their beliefs).
However, if you believe that you have a mind open to different ideas, viewpoints and/or approaches to the Bible, then this book is worth taking the time to read. I was especially taken by the Professor's chapters on the letters of Paul and Revelation each of which provided me with new outlooks on each (particularly regarding Paul on the subjects of women in the church and homosexuality).
I was disappointed with the chapter on the Gospels, but that may have been (well, probably) colored by my reading of books by Professor Bart Ehrman. Professor Cox basically took the safe middle road, in my opinion, and discussed Matthew and Luke, not touching really on Mark and John.
After finishing How to Read the Bible I can definitely say that Professor Cox made me consider the Bible in a new way and that I will be looking forward to reading more of his books.
First of all, this is not the book to read if as a Christian you believe that everything found in the Bible is literally true and cannot be questioned on any level (in fact don't because I can almost guarantee that you will be throwing the book at a wall...Professor Cox doesn't pull his punches regarding fundamentalists and their beliefs).
However, if you believe that you have a mind open to different ideas, viewpoints and/or approaches to the Bible, then this book is worth taking the time to read. I was especially taken by the Professor's chapters on the letters of Paul and Revelation each of which provided me with new outlooks on each (particularly regarding Paul on the subjects of women in the church and homosexuality).
I was disappointed with the chapter on the Gospels, but that may have been (well, probably) colored by my reading of books by Professor Bart Ehrman. Professor Cox basically took the safe middle road, in my opinion, and discussed Matthew and Luke, not touching really on Mark and John.
After finishing How to Read the Bible I can definitely say that Professor Cox made me consider the Bible in a new way and that I will be looking forward to reading more of his books.
January 10, 2016
This was a really excellent and balanced account of ways to approach reading the bible, which i think would be useful to all who have an interest,whether christians or not, and from all christian traditions.
November 5, 2017
What you would expect from a very liberal pastor. No surprises.
I found that the worst part of the book was how condescending he was toward anyone who actually believes the Bible. This was directed toward his Sunday School teacher, who was very simple and lacked a "mature" understanding of the Scripture. Of course, we who believe the Bible are 'naive'. He even dismisses the great expositor Donald Grey Barnhouse as a "well-known fundamentalist preacher". I'd say his condescension just drips from the page at times. Not recommended.
I found that the worst part of the book was how condescending he was toward anyone who actually believes the Bible. This was directed toward his Sunday School teacher, who was very simple and lacked a "mature" understanding of the Scripture. Of course, we who believe the Bible are 'naive'. He even dismisses the great expositor Donald Grey Barnhouse as a "well-known fundamentalist preacher". I'd say his condescension just drips from the page at times. Not recommended.
January 15, 2016
Cox gives a cogent example of liberal Bible reading. The book is mis-named, though. It should have been titled "How I Read the Bible", and given up the pretense of teaching others how to do the job. His case studies are interesting and at times insightful, but he does very little in the way of laying out principles for others to read the way he does.
February 8, 2016
This is an exe book that helps anyone who wants a more in-depth knowledge of the Bible. Harvey Cox's books are always outstanding.
January 15, 2018
Harvey Cox has fascinated me since his early work, The Secular City. From my background, Cox is on the “liberal” side of the theological spectrum. He doesn’t have confidence in the historical kernels found in the Old Testament narratives in which I simply try to apply appropriate evidence as far as it goes and be as honest as I can. Cox believes less; I believe more; and some would consider us both “liberal” in interpretation.
The good news is that Cox isn’t trying to grind any particular axe in How to Read the Bible, this very introductory volume for biblical studies. He is simply trying to open the reader’s mind to new possibilities of interpretation. At times, he is too reductionist for my taste, but in his approach to Genesis, he offers an accessible approach to what biblical scholars call “source criticism” and which Cox treats as “traditions.” Yet, for me, he doesn’t go far enough in terms of considering the purpose and needs of the editors along the way (in my perspective, editors like authors/narrators would be inspired, too) and how the current shape of the book could be applied in later periods and the modern period. Fortunately, he does a better part in other portions of the book.
In Cox’s consideration of Exodus, his historical skepticism comes into play. He seems to be looking at archaeology for a neat schematic of the 13th century when even the biblical text indicates a very chaotic, messy if you will, “itinerary” for proto-Israel/nascent Israel. By discounting the historicity for the 13th century venues and events, he is able to suggest the timing in which the final form of the narrative came into being and that allows him to jump over gaps of time and contingency to reinterpret the sagas in something of a black theology/liberation theology approach.
With his consideration of Joshua (largely skipping the legal material and narratives in the rest of the Pentateuch), Cox introduces the idea called “narrative criticism,” something of a modern development out of literary and rhetorical criticism. Cox rightly identifies certain narratives as “comic relief” without undermining the message therein, but opts for this approach largely because of the lack of archaeological evidence tied to the 13th century dating of the “conquest.” On the other hand, he doesn’t buy into the “revolution” motif of Norman Gottwald, either. However, I seriously doubt his suggestion that Joshua is mostly an idealized version of Josiah placed in an ancient story during his revival.
The fact that Cox sees many accounts in the Bible as pure fiction can readily be seen in his treatment of the Book of Job. While Cox is correct in noting that the poetic power of the book is timeless and that there are external (non-Hebrew) materials that might have inspired the shape of the book, the existence of multiple versions of the story might indicate a historical kernel to the story. I was excited to see that Cox referred to the Broadway play, J.B., from the mid-20th century. Another interesting quotation was a reference to Gustavo Gutierrez. “Gutierrez calls his approach ‘theology done from the garbage heap.’ He holds that the theme of the book of Job is not the impenetrable human mystery of suffering, but rather how to speak of God from the rubbish pile.” (p. 94) I most appreciated Cox’s take on the epilogue to the book. Some scholars try to make Job’s repentance into irony or sarcasm, but Cox notes that the word translated “repent” can be translated differently (its root idea is intense feeling) and agrees with Stephen Mitchell’s poetic interpretation that “Nor does the reference to ‘dust’ imply self-demeaning. It is not about self-deprecation. It is an acknowledgment of his finitude.” (p. 100) Much later in the book, Cox cites an old observation: “There is no such thing as translation, just interpretation.” (p. 148)
Using the Hebrew prophets as an opportunity to write about form criticism (though Cox likes to avoid criticism and call it “form analysis”) has been around since the early 20th century. It is the recognition that there are oral forms behind the written text. Since the book is written to the lay person, I would have thought that Cox would have given a few specific examples of forms, but the chapter tends to blend together as a summary of prophets as speaking to power on behalf of the powerless. Yet, I don’t perceive Cox as helping the reader see how things worked. Fortunately, the chapter did deal with the issue of ecstatic speech and mystic visions in a positive way.
Then, Cox shifts to the New Testament, particularly the gospels. Yet, before addressing the gospels directly, he takes the opportunity to write about “canonization,” the selection process of gospels to be “official” books in the Bible. Although he reduces much of the process to theological politics and almost equates extrabiblical gospels allegedly by Mary, Philip, and Thomas (or the Gospel of Truth) with the canonical gospels. Cox emphasizes the reality that each gospel has a personality that has been shaped to meet the needs of specific audiences. For all his historical skepticism, he puts the idea of the essential kernel of the narrative well: “Underneath all the tinsel, the story is true.” (p. 144)
Throughout his summary of The Gospel of Matthew, Cox sprinkles marvelous metaphors throughout. He calls John the Baptizer a character who “fills the slot of an opening band at a rock concert.” (p. 145). Or how about his comparison of the impact of “cleansing” the temple to the recent “Occupy” movement (p. 155). Then, as Cox segues into Pauline Studies, he introduces the idea of empire-studies (the idea that one must interpret the New Testament through the lens of people largely oppressed by and disenfranchised by the Roman Empire) by stating, “Rome was not just a backdrop. It was a force field.” (p. 167) The chapter on Revelation describes the island of Patmos as “the Guantanamo of its era.” (p. 189) Again, because of its history of interpretation (and misinterpretation), Cox writes: “It is like a powerful drug that can be a medicine for some, but a poison for others.” (p. 211)
I was very engaged with Cox’s description of the pyramidal hierarchy of the Roman Empire as a patronage system of layer after layer that functioned somewhat like today’s “trickle-down” theory (p. 173, but “trickle down” is my interpretation of what Cox wrote). Cox then sees Paul’s exhortations to sharing, gifts, and donations from the better off believers to the poorer ones as where, “An extensive web of horizontal giving and receiving arose, which liberated the citizens of the new era of shalom from the clutches of the Roman patronage system.” (p. 175)
The discussion on the Book of Revelation (notice the absence of the plural; it isn’t “Revelations”) is very well-presented with not only a focus on beleaguered Christians in a hostile state, but also with regard to the history of its interpretation and what Cox calls “effect history” (what impact does the text have through history and today—p. 189). I particularly liked his explanation of the book’s use of apocalyptic imagery. “He used this eerie, often uncanny, imagery to deepen the resonance of what he wrote, the way a filmmaker adds a musical score to heighten what appears on the screen.” (p. 196) Of course, as Cox notes on the same page, “But it would have knitted the brows of the Roman censors.” (p. 196) He also quoted G. K. Chesterton’s observation that, “…although John ‘saw many strange monsters in his vision, he saw no creatures so wild as his commentators.’” (p. 196)
Cox ends with a strong message in the final chapter and that is how I shall summarize his primary emphasis in this book. “The point is that if we do not read the Bible with a genuine openness to being spoken to, perhaps upset and shaken by what we find in it, we will have missed the message.” (p. 217) Our openness and trust in God’s Spirit is the key. The Bible, for all its detractors, still is the best way to know God and ourselves better.
The good news is that Cox isn’t trying to grind any particular axe in How to Read the Bible, this very introductory volume for biblical studies. He is simply trying to open the reader’s mind to new possibilities of interpretation. At times, he is too reductionist for my taste, but in his approach to Genesis, he offers an accessible approach to what biblical scholars call “source criticism” and which Cox treats as “traditions.” Yet, for me, he doesn’t go far enough in terms of considering the purpose and needs of the editors along the way (in my perspective, editors like authors/narrators would be inspired, too) and how the current shape of the book could be applied in later periods and the modern period. Fortunately, he does a better part in other portions of the book.
In Cox’s consideration of Exodus, his historical skepticism comes into play. He seems to be looking at archaeology for a neat schematic of the 13th century when even the biblical text indicates a very chaotic, messy if you will, “itinerary” for proto-Israel/nascent Israel. By discounting the historicity for the 13th century venues and events, he is able to suggest the timing in which the final form of the narrative came into being and that allows him to jump over gaps of time and contingency to reinterpret the sagas in something of a black theology/liberation theology approach.
With his consideration of Joshua (largely skipping the legal material and narratives in the rest of the Pentateuch), Cox introduces the idea called “narrative criticism,” something of a modern development out of literary and rhetorical criticism. Cox rightly identifies certain narratives as “comic relief” without undermining the message therein, but opts for this approach largely because of the lack of archaeological evidence tied to the 13th century dating of the “conquest.” On the other hand, he doesn’t buy into the “revolution” motif of Norman Gottwald, either. However, I seriously doubt his suggestion that Joshua is mostly an idealized version of Josiah placed in an ancient story during his revival.
The fact that Cox sees many accounts in the Bible as pure fiction can readily be seen in his treatment of the Book of Job. While Cox is correct in noting that the poetic power of the book is timeless and that there are external (non-Hebrew) materials that might have inspired the shape of the book, the existence of multiple versions of the story might indicate a historical kernel to the story. I was excited to see that Cox referred to the Broadway play, J.B., from the mid-20th century. Another interesting quotation was a reference to Gustavo Gutierrez. “Gutierrez calls his approach ‘theology done from the garbage heap.’ He holds that the theme of the book of Job is not the impenetrable human mystery of suffering, but rather how to speak of God from the rubbish pile.” (p. 94) I most appreciated Cox’s take on the epilogue to the book. Some scholars try to make Job’s repentance into irony or sarcasm, but Cox notes that the word translated “repent” can be translated differently (its root idea is intense feeling) and agrees with Stephen Mitchell’s poetic interpretation that “Nor does the reference to ‘dust’ imply self-demeaning. It is not about self-deprecation. It is an acknowledgment of his finitude.” (p. 100) Much later in the book, Cox cites an old observation: “There is no such thing as translation, just interpretation.” (p. 148)
Using the Hebrew prophets as an opportunity to write about form criticism (though Cox likes to avoid criticism and call it “form analysis”) has been around since the early 20th century. It is the recognition that there are oral forms behind the written text. Since the book is written to the lay person, I would have thought that Cox would have given a few specific examples of forms, but the chapter tends to blend together as a summary of prophets as speaking to power on behalf of the powerless. Yet, I don’t perceive Cox as helping the reader see how things worked. Fortunately, the chapter did deal with the issue of ecstatic speech and mystic visions in a positive way.
Then, Cox shifts to the New Testament, particularly the gospels. Yet, before addressing the gospels directly, he takes the opportunity to write about “canonization,” the selection process of gospels to be “official” books in the Bible. Although he reduces much of the process to theological politics and almost equates extrabiblical gospels allegedly by Mary, Philip, and Thomas (or the Gospel of Truth) with the canonical gospels. Cox emphasizes the reality that each gospel has a personality that has been shaped to meet the needs of specific audiences. For all his historical skepticism, he puts the idea of the essential kernel of the narrative well: “Underneath all the tinsel, the story is true.” (p. 144)
Throughout his summary of The Gospel of Matthew, Cox sprinkles marvelous metaphors throughout. He calls John the Baptizer a character who “fills the slot of an opening band at a rock concert.” (p. 145). Or how about his comparison of the impact of “cleansing” the temple to the recent “Occupy” movement (p. 155). Then, as Cox segues into Pauline Studies, he introduces the idea of empire-studies (the idea that one must interpret the New Testament through the lens of people largely oppressed by and disenfranchised by the Roman Empire) by stating, “Rome was not just a backdrop. It was a force field.” (p. 167) The chapter on Revelation describes the island of Patmos as “the Guantanamo of its era.” (p. 189) Again, because of its history of interpretation (and misinterpretation), Cox writes: “It is like a powerful drug that can be a medicine for some, but a poison for others.” (p. 211)
I was very engaged with Cox’s description of the pyramidal hierarchy of the Roman Empire as a patronage system of layer after layer that functioned somewhat like today’s “trickle-down” theory (p. 173, but “trickle down” is my interpretation of what Cox wrote). Cox then sees Paul’s exhortations to sharing, gifts, and donations from the better off believers to the poorer ones as where, “An extensive web of horizontal giving and receiving arose, which liberated the citizens of the new era of shalom from the clutches of the Roman patronage system.” (p. 175)
The discussion on the Book of Revelation (notice the absence of the plural; it isn’t “Revelations”) is very well-presented with not only a focus on beleaguered Christians in a hostile state, but also with regard to the history of its interpretation and what Cox calls “effect history” (what impact does the text have through history and today—p. 189). I particularly liked his explanation of the book’s use of apocalyptic imagery. “He used this eerie, often uncanny, imagery to deepen the resonance of what he wrote, the way a filmmaker adds a musical score to heighten what appears on the screen.” (p. 196) Of course, as Cox notes on the same page, “But it would have knitted the brows of the Roman censors.” (p. 196) He also quoted G. K. Chesterton’s observation that, “…although John ‘saw many strange monsters in his vision, he saw no creatures so wild as his commentators.’” (p. 196)
Cox ends with a strong message in the final chapter and that is how I shall summarize his primary emphasis in this book. “The point is that if we do not read the Bible with a genuine openness to being spoken to, perhaps upset and shaken by what we find in it, we will have missed the message.” (p. 217) Our openness and trust in God’s Spirit is the key. The Bible, for all its detractors, still is the best way to know God and ourselves better.
October 18, 2017
Excellent book, an eye-opener mostly in its initial chapters (its suggestions of the meaning of Adam and Eve certainly aroused my interest) ; got a tad bit bored with the prophets chapter, but had to laugh at some of the wry comments on Revelation (clue: "Boy, John hated the Romans!"). If you're a literalist, this book's historical details may be hard to stomach, but if you're interested in the general history of who wrote what in the Bible and where certain books came from (they're not even sure 'Job' was written by a Jewish author), it's an excellent read.
October 29, 2019
super clean and simple reflections on the ways people have made sense of the bible / gentle grandfatherly dunking on literalists & selective readers. theology wears me out pretty fast and this is mercifully almost free of unanswerable questions -- or rather, it rephrases them productively.
December 31, 2015
How to Read the Bible is an introduction to modern methods of Biblical studies intended for interested non-scholars. In this I think it succeeds. Wisely, Cox presents these methods through their application. For example, he describes empire studies and then explains how empire studies helps us understand Paul's letters. Better than most "introductions to the Bible" you come away with a better sense of how the church, if it chooses, can use current Biblical studies to inform its understanding of the Bible and the church's role in the world. Whether the church will choose is another matter.
As far as Cox's stated goal of bringing "bible studies" and "biblical studies" together this book can at best be considered an initial start. Cox returns to the question of "bible studies" in the final chapter but really only provides a few starting places. I hope that someone comes up with a companion volume that delves more deeply into how to integrate the scholarship Cox describes into the average bible study.
As far as Cox's stated goal of bringing "bible studies" and "biblical studies" together this book can at best be considered an initial start. Cox returns to the question of "bible studies" in the final chapter but really only provides a few starting places. I hope that someone comes up with a companion volume that delves more deeply into how to integrate the scholarship Cox describes into the average bible study.
December 9, 2016
A scholar who though a believer, shuns the literalist interpretations and shows the context of various Books and stories in the Bible. Relying on the most recent research from a range of fields, Cox discusses on what the Bible meant when it was written and how it speaks to contemporary society. Good commentary on how the Bible is both used and abused. Broken down into manageable sections, it does include technical terms and jargon but simplifies those terms to demonstrate how the different schools of interpretation have flaws and strengths. A refreshing approach to a controversial topic with a balanced and sensible critique.
May 17, 2015
I will be reviewing this book for the Christian Century, so I'll save my thoughts for that forum. Let's just say that this is an interesting if at times idiosyncratic book that seeks, from a liberal perspective, to encourage us to read the Bible with an expectation that it will have meaning for today.
June 24, 2015
The book I've been waiting for about the bible. Met the author at Harvard. He's a treasure.
September 18, 2015
This was a helpful non-literalist approach to the Bible. It should be interesting to any seeker who is open to various approaches to reading the Bible.
August 3, 2015
Fabulous, academic and objective way to read the Bible. Got it from the library but DEFINITELY need my own copy to mark up!
May 11, 2015
Read this book
July 25, 2015
The fact that Harvey Cox likes Deepak Chopra pretty much says it all. They both want to make Jesus into a Buddha. (Cox fully endorses Deepak's Third Jesus book: "Jesus has now long since escaped the confines of church, Christianity, and even religions.") And according to this paper-weight offering - even THE BIBLE.
The title of this book is very misleading. It should really be:
"How to read the Bible like a historical Jesus hating liberal."
Just for fun: Here's a definition of the term LIBERAL:
1. open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
2. (of education) concerned mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.
So according to Mr. Cox, Jesus is not really to be traditionally, or factually, trusted. And Cox is desperate to find New and broadening methods to read the Bible (that really aren't technical or professional).
My question as I began to read this dribble was: Who is Harvey Cox's Jesus? And does he really need this Jesus? I just wanted Harvey to state one factual thing about Jesus that makes it necessary to be a Christian... just one... anything. We get nothing but liberal lies. Harvey, of course, does not think he is lying. He's just desperate to do away with anything reliable and literal when it comes to Biblical scripture. You don't have to be a liar to believe lies. Harvey is probably a really nice fun guy. He just hates traditional Fundamental Conservative Christianity (it does get in the way of Gay sex, abortion, and endlessly fun sin)- therefore he is determined to make Jesus do the same thing. And a guy like this cannot bend scripture far enough to make it happen - and so he does for 250 pages.
Like all liberal Bible Know-It-Alls, Cox shows us how God is NOT revealed in the Bible. No days of creation, No garden incident with a talking snake and deathful sin, No wrathful deity flooding the planet and saving a few chosen righteous folk...No Sodom & Gomorrah of course - God would never disapprove of Gay Sex... The problem is: When does Harvey's Bible start being factual? Well, it doesn't. EVER! And yet Harvey claims to be a Jesus loving Christian based on???...ummmh?
At some point Harvey's Bible suddenly comes to life and gives us a Buddhist Jesus we can all cheerish. Time for some quotes:
Cox thinks it worthwhile to recommend: Tibetan Dalai Lama's book A Buddhist perspective on the Teachings of Jesus - provides an excellent alternative view of the Gospels. (Apparently the Gospels aren't clear enough for Cox.) And yet he claims to be a Christian?
"In answering our question about how to read the Bible, we must be careful NOT to read it as the only authentic source of faith, but instead to see it as one among several." Cox does love his Buddhism.
So what makes the Bible special? Or better than the Book of Mormon or Quran? Nothing.
"The bible tells a single story...It is a (fictional/non-historical* I'm just helping Harvey be more clear) book about the dramatic interaction between God and the world, mainly that part of the world we call humankind. The story comes to us through the imperfect, often badly flawed words and perceptions of human beings."
Fair enough Harvey. So what does the Holy Spirit have to do with Harvey's Bible? Apparently NOTHING. Nowhere does Harvey state how the Spirit of God worked through people to give us a guiding and accurate account of God's thoughts and laws. Nothing to trust or apply to society that came straight from God. Just borrowed myths and fables that MIGHT??? mean something to people every now and then. No truthful prophecies of Jesus (the Redeemer and Savior, Lamb slain for the sins of the world) and guiding force for the salvation of mankind.
So how did Cox get to be so liberally useless: Here's a quote
"A change came when, as a teenager, I attended some Bible study sessions at a student conference, The teacher was a black Baptist pastor who stood firmly in the social gospel tradition."
Harvey claims men like... I'll just quote:
"What is a prophet?...Moses...Samuel, Elijah, Amos...in modern usage the word is also applied to inspiring moral leaders such as Martin Luther King, Jr., and Nelson Mandela."
Seriously? Harvey thinks so little of God's voice that he reduces great Biblical men to mere social gurus.
__________________________________________
Whew! This is long eh? I could go all day picking this crap apart. But I won't. I'll try to wrap it up.
Cox (and other liberals) love mentioning, and quoting Jewish scholars as a reliable source on spiritual and factually historic matters. And yet he forgets that JESUS was murdered by these same people. Not simply Jews mind you - but Jewish scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees and scholars.
"Many Jewish scholars...They feel that Christians have overrated the prophets, elevating their significance because they are so often seen as predictors of Jesus Christ. There are real grounds for their caution..."
You Idiot, that is what makes us Christians. Jesus as our God and Savior: John 1
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it...
9The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15(John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”)
John 1:
29The next day (John) he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
So can we trust scripture and prophets to give us all we need for eternal Salvation? Jesus thought so. He told us: Luke 16:19-31
27And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ 30And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”
Hell is HOT Harvey Cox. Your every effort is to discredit the Bible and reduce Jesus to a mere Guru who tickles your ears and pleases your here and now. Harvey even speaks of himself:
"Even those who people who devote their careers to trying to discredit the Bible are shaped by it." Like Mr. Cox himself. He even speaks as an atheist with no eternal understandings or values:
"At some point it dawned on me that endless life might eventually become unbearably boring...After ten thousand years, wouldn't we all be ready to call it quits?"
And that is how much Harvey's heart loves Jesus and the promise of His Kingdom. Harvey is not interested in Jesus at all. He thinks it would be boring to spend eternity with the King of kings. (As well as sparring with flaming swords and mock battles with Michael...and dinners with Moses and the Thief on the Cross.)
_________________________________________________
It seems that Harvey could apply the exact same methods to all or any religious scribblings (Or Harry Potter for that matter) and end up with a Jesus (Or Harry?) who gives us liberal meaning and hope for this life NOW. With no eternal salvation or heavenly Kingdom even on the table.
To sum it up:
Mr. Cox has no clear source or guide on: Sin, History, Beginnings, Prophecy, Love, Justice...or truth. His Bible does none of that for him. No more than a Batman comic book would. Harvey does not claim to need an eternal Savior or a sacrifice for his endless sin. (just another social gospel buddha)
After all that crap demoting the Word of God to mere cultural stories and opinions Harvey dares to say: "My hope is that at many points you will lay it aside and turn to the Book that this books is about. And when you do, my hope is that you may come to know both God and yourself a little better, since in the end the two cannot be separated."
EXCEPT IN HELL HARVEY COX. The Bible speaks greatly of this. Even your Jesus mentions Judgement many times.(but harvey most likely doesn't believe in hell. Even though his buddhist buddies are fond of Hell-beings, Demons, Hungry Ghosts, and Demi-gods.)
Harvey even hits on the truth every now and then:
"As for those who read it in order to discredit it, I would forewarn them that what they are doing has been tried for centuries, but somehow the Bible has survived and even flourished."
Yes, the Christian God has the number 1 best selling book on the planet. Harvey is smart enough to know that - but just like the snake in the Garden of Eden: You don't undo the Garden or the God... You just cause humans to quest beyond that:
Genesis 3
1Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.
He (the snake) said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” 2And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” 4But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
Mr. Cox is no different than the snake stating "Did God actually say?" And now Harvey claims his eyes are open. Open to WHAT? Harvey is questing to be like God with his liberal Buddhism approach to Holy Scriptures.
I could go on & on, but that's enough. Harvey has a LOT to answer for.
The title of this book is very misleading. It should really be:
"How to read the Bible like a historical Jesus hating liberal."
Just for fun: Here's a definition of the term LIBERAL:
1. open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
2. (of education) concerned mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.
So according to Mr. Cox, Jesus is not really to be traditionally, or factually, trusted. And Cox is desperate to find New and broadening methods to read the Bible (that really aren't technical or professional).
My question as I began to read this dribble was: Who is Harvey Cox's Jesus? And does he really need this Jesus? I just wanted Harvey to state one factual thing about Jesus that makes it necessary to be a Christian... just one... anything. We get nothing but liberal lies. Harvey, of course, does not think he is lying. He's just desperate to do away with anything reliable and literal when it comes to Biblical scripture. You don't have to be a liar to believe lies. Harvey is probably a really nice fun guy. He just hates traditional Fundamental Conservative Christianity (it does get in the way of Gay sex, abortion, and endlessly fun sin)- therefore he is determined to make Jesus do the same thing. And a guy like this cannot bend scripture far enough to make it happen - and so he does for 250 pages.
Like all liberal Bible Know-It-Alls, Cox shows us how God is NOT revealed in the Bible. No days of creation, No garden incident with a talking snake and deathful sin, No wrathful deity flooding the planet and saving a few chosen righteous folk...No Sodom & Gomorrah of course - God would never disapprove of Gay Sex... The problem is: When does Harvey's Bible start being factual? Well, it doesn't. EVER! And yet Harvey claims to be a Jesus loving Christian based on???...ummmh?
At some point Harvey's Bible suddenly comes to life and gives us a Buddhist Jesus we can all cheerish. Time for some quotes:
Cox thinks it worthwhile to recommend: Tibetan Dalai Lama's book A Buddhist perspective on the Teachings of Jesus - provides an excellent alternative view of the Gospels. (Apparently the Gospels aren't clear enough for Cox.) And yet he claims to be a Christian?
"In answering our question about how to read the Bible, we must be careful NOT to read it as the only authentic source of faith, but instead to see it as one among several." Cox does love his Buddhism.
So what makes the Bible special? Or better than the Book of Mormon or Quran? Nothing.
"The bible tells a single story...It is a (fictional/non-historical* I'm just helping Harvey be more clear) book about the dramatic interaction between God and the world, mainly that part of the world we call humankind. The story comes to us through the imperfect, often badly flawed words and perceptions of human beings."
Fair enough Harvey. So what does the Holy Spirit have to do with Harvey's Bible? Apparently NOTHING. Nowhere does Harvey state how the Spirit of God worked through people to give us a guiding and accurate account of God's thoughts and laws. Nothing to trust or apply to society that came straight from God. Just borrowed myths and fables that MIGHT??? mean something to people every now and then. No truthful prophecies of Jesus (the Redeemer and Savior, Lamb slain for the sins of the world) and guiding force for the salvation of mankind.
So how did Cox get to be so liberally useless: Here's a quote
"A change came when, as a teenager, I attended some Bible study sessions at a student conference, The teacher was a black Baptist pastor who stood firmly in the social gospel tradition."
Harvey claims men like... I'll just quote:
"What is a prophet?...Moses...Samuel, Elijah, Amos...in modern usage the word is also applied to inspiring moral leaders such as Martin Luther King, Jr., and Nelson Mandela."
Seriously? Harvey thinks so little of God's voice that he reduces great Biblical men to mere social gurus.
__________________________________________
Whew! This is long eh? I could go all day picking this crap apart. But I won't. I'll try to wrap it up.
Cox (and other liberals) love mentioning, and quoting Jewish scholars as a reliable source on spiritual and factually historic matters. And yet he forgets that JESUS was murdered by these same people. Not simply Jews mind you - but Jewish scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees and scholars.
"Many Jewish scholars...They feel that Christians have overrated the prophets, elevating their significance because they are so often seen as predictors of Jesus Christ. There are real grounds for their caution..."
You Idiot, that is what makes us Christians. Jesus as our God and Savior: John 1
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4In him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it...
9The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15(John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”)
John 1:
29The next day (John) he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
So can we trust scripture and prophets to give us all we need for eternal Salvation? Jesus thought so. He told us: Luke 16:19-31
27And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ 30And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”
Hell is HOT Harvey Cox. Your every effort is to discredit the Bible and reduce Jesus to a mere Guru who tickles your ears and pleases your here and now. Harvey even speaks of himself:
"Even those who people who devote their careers to trying to discredit the Bible are shaped by it." Like Mr. Cox himself. He even speaks as an atheist with no eternal understandings or values:
"At some point it dawned on me that endless life might eventually become unbearably boring...After ten thousand years, wouldn't we all be ready to call it quits?"
And that is how much Harvey's heart loves Jesus and the promise of His Kingdom. Harvey is not interested in Jesus at all. He thinks it would be boring to spend eternity with the King of kings. (As well as sparring with flaming swords and mock battles with Michael...and dinners with Moses and the Thief on the Cross.)
_________________________________________________
It seems that Harvey could apply the exact same methods to all or any religious scribblings (Or Harry Potter for that matter) and end up with a Jesus (Or Harry?) who gives us liberal meaning and hope for this life NOW. With no eternal salvation or heavenly Kingdom even on the table.
To sum it up:
Mr. Cox has no clear source or guide on: Sin, History, Beginnings, Prophecy, Love, Justice...or truth. His Bible does none of that for him. No more than a Batman comic book would. Harvey does not claim to need an eternal Savior or a sacrifice for his endless sin. (just another social gospel buddha)
After all that crap demoting the Word of God to mere cultural stories and opinions Harvey dares to say: "My hope is that at many points you will lay it aside and turn to the Book that this books is about. And when you do, my hope is that you may come to know both God and yourself a little better, since in the end the two cannot be separated."
EXCEPT IN HELL HARVEY COX. The Bible speaks greatly of this. Even your Jesus mentions Judgement many times.(but harvey most likely doesn't believe in hell. Even though his buddhist buddies are fond of Hell-beings, Demons, Hungry Ghosts, and Demi-gods.)
Harvey even hits on the truth every now and then:
"As for those who read it in order to discredit it, I would forewarn them that what they are doing has been tried for centuries, but somehow the Bible has survived and even flourished."
Yes, the Christian God has the number 1 best selling book on the planet. Harvey is smart enough to know that - but just like the snake in the Garden of Eden: You don't undo the Garden or the God... You just cause humans to quest beyond that:
Genesis 3
1Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.
He (the snake) said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” 2And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” 4But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
Mr. Cox is no different than the snake stating "Did God actually say?" And now Harvey claims his eyes are open. Open to WHAT? Harvey is questing to be like God with his liberal Buddhism approach to Holy Scriptures.
I could go on & on, but that's enough. Harvey has a LOT to answer for.
May 16, 2023
What happens when someone is well educated and accepts the findings of contemporary science (read: evolution and cosmology), archeology, and textual criticism, but still wants to be a Christian? That individual writes a book like this. A few quotes with my responses:
---
Quote: Those of the new generation realize that real knowledge of a historical personage, period, or biblical passage demands the cultivation of a kind of give-and-take. Also in doing their work, they are increasingly aware that they are not only writing about; they are also writing for. They have a purpose for doing it. They are human beings with fears and hopes, and they select their topics, direct their research, and frame their writing with some audience and some goal in mind. The result is that objectivity is fading from view, and a candid awareness of one's personal objective is becoming more conscious.
Response: This makes the human authors' "hopes and fears" more significant than the supposed divine inspiration behind it all. Furthermore, if the ultimate source is divine, why would the authors "select their topics" or "direct their research" -- indeed, why would they even need research if the source of their writing is the omnipotent, omniscient creator of all. This is the problem with a progressive interpretation of the Bible: at best it makes divine inspiration problematic, at worst, impossible.
Quote: the writer of the account that appears in chapter 1, may have wanted to depict a God-shaping-chaos scenario, while the second, "J" preferred the creation out of nothing (2:4b-5). If "P" is right, with his God-shaping-chaos description, where did the chaos come from? Did God also create that as well? This becomes a critical question for generations of philosophers, because this chaos (not God) is often interpreted as the source of evil and disorder in the world. But if the second version ("J"), the ex nihilo account, is right, then we are left with the question of where this disorder and evil came from. Theologians have faced a strenuous test trying to explore this ambiguity. Those who opt for an ex nihilo version do so in part because they are concerned that if there was "something there" along with God before the creating began, then what was it (a "formless void"?) and, most important, who created it? Or was it "always there"? Both the supporters of "J" and those of "p" want to steer clear of a dualistic theology. They want to avoid any hint of two creators, a good cop and a bad cop. (24)
Response: Why would an omnipotent god use four different writers whose works are then cobbled together into a single piece, which for millennia is assumed to come from one single author, when we're talking about the most important message in history? Wouldn't this omniscient god see the problem it's creating by communicating in this manner and in its complete benevolence seek to avoid the confusion that arises from this?
Quote: I remember sitting up half the night engrossed in [Berdyaev's] book The Destiny of Man. Today I still think Berdyaev may have had something. As I will mention later, I am not satisfied with the ex nihilo interpretation of the creation account, which implies a God who is utterly omnipotent and therefore does not have to struggle against evil as we humans do. Nor am I comfortable with a cosmic dualism. Consequently, I am glad the Bible allows for, indeed encourages, a range of views on this subject. I find it appropriate that the Bible says some quite contrasting things, even about some weighty matters, from its very opening, because this tips us off that for some sixty-five books to come there will be more of this divergence. In reading the Bible, get ready not for unanimity, not for a single cadence, but for what the New Testament Letter to the Hebrews calls a "great cloud of witnesses." (26)
Response: This feels like a clever way of dealing with the numerous contradictions in the Bible. They're not problematic: they're just divergent ways of viewing the same thing.
---
What you end up with is silliness. Why would anyone accept as a holy book a book clearly written by humans? If the Bible IS from God, none of this should apply.
More liberal theology nonsense from Cox
---
Quote: Those of the new generation realize that real knowledge of a historical personage, period, or biblical passage demands the cultivation of a kind of give-and-take. Also in doing their work, they are increasingly aware that they are not only writing about; they are also writing for. They have a purpose for doing it. They are human beings with fears and hopes, and they select their topics, direct their research, and frame their writing with some audience and some goal in mind. The result is that objectivity is fading from view, and a candid awareness of one's personal objective is becoming more conscious.
Response: This makes the human authors' "hopes and fears" more significant than the supposed divine inspiration behind it all. Furthermore, if the ultimate source is divine, why would the authors "select their topics" or "direct their research" -- indeed, why would they even need research if the source of their writing is the omnipotent, omniscient creator of all. This is the problem with a progressive interpretation of the Bible: at best it makes divine inspiration problematic, at worst, impossible.
Quote: the writer of the account that appears in chapter 1, may have wanted to depict a God-shaping-chaos scenario, while the second, "J" preferred the creation out of nothing (2:4b-5). If "P" is right, with his God-shaping-chaos description, where did the chaos come from? Did God also create that as well? This becomes a critical question for generations of philosophers, because this chaos (not God) is often interpreted as the source of evil and disorder in the world. But if the second version ("J"), the ex nihilo account, is right, then we are left with the question of where this disorder and evil came from. Theologians have faced a strenuous test trying to explore this ambiguity. Those who opt for an ex nihilo version do so in part because they are concerned that if there was "something there" along with God before the creating began, then what was it (a "formless void"?) and, most important, who created it? Or was it "always there"? Both the supporters of "J" and those of "p" want to steer clear of a dualistic theology. They want to avoid any hint of two creators, a good cop and a bad cop. (24)
Response: Why would an omnipotent god use four different writers whose works are then cobbled together into a single piece, which for millennia is assumed to come from one single author, when we're talking about the most important message in history? Wouldn't this omniscient god see the problem it's creating by communicating in this manner and in its complete benevolence seek to avoid the confusion that arises from this?
Quote: I remember sitting up half the night engrossed in [Berdyaev's] book The Destiny of Man. Today I still think Berdyaev may have had something. As I will mention later, I am not satisfied with the ex nihilo interpretation of the creation account, which implies a God who is utterly omnipotent and therefore does not have to struggle against evil as we humans do. Nor am I comfortable with a cosmic dualism. Consequently, I am glad the Bible allows for, indeed encourages, a range of views on this subject. I find it appropriate that the Bible says some quite contrasting things, even about some weighty matters, from its very opening, because this tips us off that for some sixty-five books to come there will be more of this divergence. In reading the Bible, get ready not for unanimity, not for a single cadence, but for what the New Testament Letter to the Hebrews calls a "great cloud of witnesses." (26)
Response: This feels like a clever way of dealing with the numerous contradictions in the Bible. They're not problematic: they're just divergent ways of viewing the same thing.
---
What you end up with is silliness. Why would anyone accept as a holy book a book clearly written by humans? If the Bible IS from God, none of this should apply.
More liberal theology nonsense from Cox
August 22, 2021
Growing up, a leather-bound Bible with fancy, paper-thin pages, extremely tiny text, and pages of paintings depicting epic scenes was on the shelf of a table in our living room. I never saw anyone read that Bible. Periodically, my mother recorded births and deaths, and the Bible held roses pressed in wax paper from funerals and locks of baby hair from her brother. As a freshman in college, I studied the Old and New Testament, a dry, mandatory course which did not invite me to delve any deeper, and I continued to keep the Bible at arm's length for most of my adult life.
Several years ago, I found myself in a course based on "When Jesus Came to Harvard," then, one using "The Future of Faith," and then, last spring, "How to Read the Bible," all written by scholar Harvey Cox. As with his other books, his writing here is focused, made thorny questions accessible, brought scholarship and research when appropriate, and celebrated the imagination of the rabbis inventing "midrashim," extensions of Biblical passages that make them applicable over the generations.
Perhaps my biggest takeaway are the two questions he frames the reading of the Bible, based on one of his teachers, Krister Stendahl: What did it mean then? What does it mean now? Cox believes they are connected, that any reading of the Bible embeds our language, thinking and culture; don't worry about objectivity, if you will. Further, the book is filled with "study tips" such as how to approach the reading: 1. Ask "what is happening here"? 2. Uncover the "who, when, where, and why" of any passage 3. Move to the spiritual stage, wrestling with the text, arguing, and permitting yourself to see things differently. Cox gently holds the hand of the reader in every chapter and then challenges one's thinking by the end.
I especially appreciated the chapter, "On the Road with Paul of Tarsus." Cox begins by acknowledging Paul has recently "hit a rough patch." Just for starters, Paul has been accused of allegedly being against women and homosexuality and in favor of slavery and obeying government at all cost. Cox unpacked the history, the context, and presented the evolving thinking of Paul in a world that is vastly different from Paul's..."Yes, what it meant is important to know, but what it has come to mean is also important." So, after this thoughtful discussion, I am not so strident about Paul these days.
Finally, his thoughts on why we read the Bible today in this chaotic world resonated with me. He says the Bible has shaped our history, our civilization, is embedded in our art, music, language and literature. It is a path to understanding yourself better and deepening a relationship with God. I don't think I'm there yet, but I keep leaning on Harvey Cox to get there.
Several years ago, I found myself in a course based on "When Jesus Came to Harvard," then, one using "The Future of Faith," and then, last spring, "How to Read the Bible," all written by scholar Harvey Cox. As with his other books, his writing here is focused, made thorny questions accessible, brought scholarship and research when appropriate, and celebrated the imagination of the rabbis inventing "midrashim," extensions of Biblical passages that make them applicable over the generations.
Perhaps my biggest takeaway are the two questions he frames the reading of the Bible, based on one of his teachers, Krister Stendahl: What did it mean then? What does it mean now? Cox believes they are connected, that any reading of the Bible embeds our language, thinking and culture; don't worry about objectivity, if you will. Further, the book is filled with "study tips" such as how to approach the reading: 1. Ask "what is happening here"? 2. Uncover the "who, when, where, and why" of any passage 3. Move to the spiritual stage, wrestling with the text, arguing, and permitting yourself to see things differently. Cox gently holds the hand of the reader in every chapter and then challenges one's thinking by the end.
I especially appreciated the chapter, "On the Road with Paul of Tarsus." Cox begins by acknowledging Paul has recently "hit a rough patch." Just for starters, Paul has been accused of allegedly being against women and homosexuality and in favor of slavery and obeying government at all cost. Cox unpacked the history, the context, and presented the evolving thinking of Paul in a world that is vastly different from Paul's..."Yes, what it meant is important to know, but what it has come to mean is also important." So, after this thoughtful discussion, I am not so strident about Paul these days.
Finally, his thoughts on why we read the Bible today in this chaotic world resonated with me. He says the Bible has shaped our history, our civilization, is embedded in our art, music, language and literature. It is a path to understanding yourself better and deepening a relationship with God. I don't think I'm there yet, but I keep leaning on Harvey Cox to get there.
August 14, 2019
How to Read the Bible is a thoughtful consideration of various ways of reading the Bible, particularly in light of biblical scholarship, archeology, and contemporary thinking and events. While Professor Cox takes an expansive view of ways to approach and find meaning in the Bible, he unequivocally maintains that the Bible is not an historical account. He is frank about how the Bible as we know it came to be, namely as a collection of writings by multiple authors over time, selected also over time by various religious authorities to affirm their own religious views. Perhaps the Bible is best thought of as an anthology of writings from various times written for various readers and for various purposes. Thus the inconsistencies, even contradictions, in the Bible. Cox does not shy away from the violence and intolerance in the Bible, nor from the mythical in the book. In fact, he finds all this liberating in that there is no one way to read the Bible. As readers we have the opportunity to find that which speaks to us, and to disregard that which does not. At our folly we disregard the Bible entirely as it is baked into the social and cultural milieu in which we live.
February 7, 2019
Harvey Cox is known to me for a text published by Penguin some decades ago and so it was with genuine surprise and pleasure that U found this book when at a warehouse book sale.
This book is part memoir, part survey of the study of religions in the context of selected books of the Bible. Cox' theme is a mixture of explaining the purpose of the books when written, what they meant then and what they mean now. He refers to liberation theologians and to fundamentalist and other perspectives, including archaeological and linguistic information.
The author, to this reader, is well across the relevant issues and discoveries. His writing style is open and objective, as well as personal and demonstrates his expertise with ease. This is not a text to convince you of belief, but neither is it one that denies that proposition, given Cox identified his position as an evangelical.
All the chapters are enjoyable, and I particularly liked those on Genesis and Revelation. Ann essential text, to be honest, even for this non-believer.
This book is part memoir, part survey of the study of religions in the context of selected books of the Bible. Cox' theme is a mixture of explaining the purpose of the books when written, what they meant then and what they mean now. He refers to liberation theologians and to fundamentalist and other perspectives, including archaeological and linguistic information.
The author, to this reader, is well across the relevant issues and discoveries. His writing style is open and objective, as well as personal and demonstrates his expertise with ease. This is not a text to convince you of belief, but neither is it one that denies that proposition, given Cox identified his position as an evangelical.
All the chapters are enjoyable, and I particularly liked those on Genesis and Revelation. Ann essential text, to be honest, even for this non-believer.
January 31, 2019
Recently, it's occurred to me that despite being an avid reader and consumer of media, I have yet to read the book that is referenced in western media more than any other, the Bible. I had decided that 2019 would be the year to do it, and while I was walking through my library, this book happened to be on display as a recommended read. I was willing to take it as a sign and pick it up.
It's very accessible for the non-theologian, and does a good job of delineating the different ways a person can read the Bible and how the approach to the book drives the reader's interpretation of it. It was nice to read something about religion that didn't feel dogmatic, and was pushing the idea of looking at different passages from different perspectives, exploring how the meaning of the text can change.
Anyway, I think this is an interesting book for anyone even remotely interested in the Bible, and for people who have read it multiple times. It could open your eyes to a new understanding of it.
It's very accessible for the non-theologian, and does a good job of delineating the different ways a person can read the Bible and how the approach to the book drives the reader's interpretation of it. It was nice to read something about religion that didn't feel dogmatic, and was pushing the idea of looking at different passages from different perspectives, exploring how the meaning of the text can change.
Anyway, I think this is an interesting book for anyone even remotely interested in the Bible, and for people who have read it multiple times. It could open your eyes to a new understanding of it.
December 16, 2017
The collection of ancient writings that make up the Bible mean different things to different people. They include fascinating stories, poetry, and inspiring proverbs, but also historical inconsistencies and internal contradictions, together with violence that ordinarily would receive an “R” rating at the cinema. What did each work mean in the era of its authorship? What does it mean today? How should the reader deal with issues such as those presented above? In “How to Read the Bible”, retired Harvard theologian Harvey Cox offers a detail study of these and other questions, along with external study suggestions. This well-researched, well-written work would be an excellent text for a study course. I highly recommend this writing, especially to conservative (fundamentalist) Christians. It might steer them away from literalism and toward the profound truth of the Bible.
July 20, 2019
See Johnny L. Wilson's excellent, extended community review of this book in Goodreads.
I like Harvey Cox. I have fond memories of him at National Cathedral, wearing a bright orange robe, leading an exorcism of the federal courthouse, during the trial of the D.C. Nine in 1971. The study tips on page 17 are handy. I can see how this book could be helpful for recovering literalists. But beyond that, I can't recommend it. If I knew little about the Bible, this book wouldn't lead me to find out more. It would probably inspire me to pursue secular philosophy--same bottom line, less baggage.
For a far more engaging non-literalist introduction to the Bible, listen to Amy-Jill Levine's lectures from The Teaching Company.
I like Harvey Cox. I have fond memories of him at National Cathedral, wearing a bright orange robe, leading an exorcism of the federal courthouse, during the trial of the D.C. Nine in 1971. The study tips on page 17 are handy. I can see how this book could be helpful for recovering literalists. But beyond that, I can't recommend it. If I knew little about the Bible, this book wouldn't lead me to find out more. It would probably inspire me to pursue secular philosophy--same bottom line, less baggage.
For a far more engaging non-literalist introduction to the Bible, listen to Amy-Jill Levine's lectures from The Teaching Company.
July 29, 2019
This book expanded my thoughts of the hows in some areas of bibical studies but didn't give me any ah-ha moments. The book uses examples of different methods of academic studies by looking at certain books in the Bible. It also addresses the small church study groups and even the individual's process in approaching the Bible in more of a footnote fashion. I found a few gems in this book worth discussion and contemplation and so could recommend it. And I agree the Bible is about knowing God and knowing yourself, which I believe is basically the message Professor Cox means to convey in this book. However, don't approach this book as if it will offer a tried and true formula for reading the Bible as the title might suggest or you'll be disappointed.
September 1, 2020
I would add a + to my 4. I REALLY, REALLY liked this book. Renowned religion Expert and Harvard Divinity School professor Harvey Cox points to a gap that exists between two groups who read the Bible: those who read for spiritual edification and those who study it academically, finding that both are missing something essential. In his book, Cox sets out to reconcile the two, showing how the Bible can be a resource that remains timeless and meaningful for all people from generation to generation. He also provides a wonderful bibliography for further study. I have read many books on the Bible but this one was readable especially for the layperson.
March 29, 2019
An informative and fascinating book
I enjoyed this book immensely. I think I would classify it more on the liberal side, however I think that the author was very respectful of the bible and its message. In fact he spoke very highly of the devotional aspect of the bible, which is highly ridiculed today. I liked how he discussed both the academic and devotional aspects of the bible and how they can complement each other. Overall this book helped me gain some new perspectives on how I can get the most out of my bible reading.
I enjoyed this book immensely. I think I would classify it more on the liberal side, however I think that the author was very respectful of the bible and its message. In fact he spoke very highly of the devotional aspect of the bible, which is highly ridiculed today. I liked how he discussed both the academic and devotional aspects of the bible and how they can complement each other. Overall this book helped me gain some new perspectives on how I can get the most out of my bible reading.
December 2, 2017
Useful and worthwhile. A divinity professor writes for a general audience about the massive anthology of mythical and religious documents spanning a thousand years that we call the Bible (derived from the Greek biblion meaning papyrus). The author employs a variety of scholarly approaches to illuminate key parts, notably Genesis, Exodus, Job, the Gospels, Paul's letters and Revelation. Accessible style and light on jargon.
June 3, 2017
Cox introduces us on the various methods we should use when studying the Bible. From narrative to historical to language and everything in between, Cox provides the reader with guidance on resources and reasoning behind his recommendations. A must-read for anyone who wishes to read the Bible in new ways.
December 15, 2021
This is probably a really good intro to the Bible for someone who's never read the book and is looking for a balanced (secular) perspective on it. Being very familiar with the Bible myself I appreciated the perspective but did not get as much as I had hoped to out of this book.
November 11, 2025
Very, very informative.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews